LocationsDigital Governance and the Social Contract:
Protecting Rights in a Tech-Driven State
By Shmyla Khan | Researcher and Campaigner
As we look towards developing a digital governance framework, Constitutional principles must remain at the centre of its design, as they contain the foundations of what our social contract with a digital future should be.
Digital governance is emerging as one of the most significant challenges of our time, with governments and international bodies scrambling to develop legal frameworks and governance models as the world shifts rapidly beneath our feet. We can see these shifts in real time, through new policies on artificial intelligence, digital public infrastructure, and data governance that are reshaping how the state exercises power, delivers services, and interacts with citizens.
Existing governance frameworks, on the other hand, feel like relics from a bygone era, struggling to adapt to these transformations. When Pakistan’s Constitution was drafted in 1973, its framers could not have imagined a society in which nearly 200 million Pakistanis carry mobile devices and where digital platforms mediate daily life. But even though it was written for an analogue world, its promise of dignity, privacy and freedom remains central today.
In 2012, the UN Human Rights Council affirmed the applicability of human rights to digital spaces, stating for the first time that “the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online”. Since then, the role of human rights with reference to technologies remains more important than ever.1 Today, with the emphasis on digital governance as a facilitator for technological growth and adoption, human rights and Constitutional safeguards are often framed as impediments rather than cornerstones of a digital future.
Yet, as we look towards developing a digital governance framework, Constitutional principles must remain at the centre of its design, as they contain the foundations of what our social contract with a digital future should be. For instance, while Pakistan’s Constitution already enshrines the right to freedom of expression, access to information, privacy, assembly and association, and non-discrimination, a digital governance framework must develop mechanisms to ensure that these rights are applied to digital contexts. Take the right to privacy, enshrined under Article 14, which was primarily understood as the privacy of one’s home. Since then, the courts have applied it to digital communications, most prominently in a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the 1997 Benazir Bhutto case.2
As we stand at the precipice of unprecedented connectivity and the rapid transformations brought on by AI, particularly given its application to governance and the delivery of public services, it is essential to anchor such developments in a human and digital rights approach.
A holistic digital governance design can only come about if we view the Constitution and its fundamental rights as a living document that is malleable and adaptable in an increasingly changing world. Through this approach we are better able to create a development agenda that is inclusive and equitable. However, upholding constitutional principles in a changing world requires more than just interpretation. Courts and those implementing policies often lack the foresight and technical expertise to anticipate the implications of emerging technologies. Proactive legislation and participatory policymaking are necessary to embed rights into digital governance.
Pakistan recently announced its National Artificial Intelligence Policy and, tellingly, human rights appear only twice in the document. In fact, there is no reference to the Constitution in the entire policy and ethics are referenced perfunctorily. Viewing technologies purely from the point of view of development and economic progress, sans a rights approach, can be detrimental to the aims we want to achieve, and comes at the cost of excluding human dignity and social welfare. Constitutional protections are critical to governing AI responsibly, particularly given the rise of facial recognition technologies, generative AI, and automated decision-making. Without foregrounding the right to privacy, freedom of expression, and non-discrimination, we risk creating frameworks that, to paraphrase AI-speak, leave humans out of the loop of development. In 2023, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, noted that the “human rights framework provides an essential foundation that can provide guardrails for efforts to exploit the enormous potential of AI, while preventing and mitigating its enormous risks.”3
Pakistan recently announced its National Artificial Intelligence Policy and, tellingly, human rights appear only twice in the document.
While the Constitution deals in general principles and lays down guardrails, it is the job of a digital governance framework, through legislation, policies, implementation plans and infrastructural choices, to translate these principles for different circumstances and contexts. While technologies can create an impression of exceptionalism, the basic principles guarding our freedoms and welfare remain constant. It is often the mechanisms and modes of upholding them that require changing. For instance, while the right to information is enshrined in Article 19(a) of the Constitution, it will need to be adapted in the context of AI, such as the right to request clear and meaningful explanations regarding the role of AI in decision-making under the EU AI Act.4 Similarly, protections against discrimination must extend to protection against algorithmic bias in automated systems.
In many ways, technologies have fundamentally changed how the state interacts with its citizens and residents, creating radically new interfaces for governance. In Pakistan, when the government passed the Digital Nation Pakistan Act, 2025, it declared that Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) is central to “accelerate sustainable economic development, improve citizen well-being, and modernize governance frameworks for efficient and effective public service delivery”.5 A digitized state requires an equally complex and comprehensive rights framework that can ensure accountability and prevent overreach.
These concerns are not merely speculative; we are seeing the rollback of digital rights in the current moment. The frequency of internet and network shutdowns speaks to how easily the state can withdraw access to digital services, often arbitrarily during elections and protests. Furthermore, the broad and vague provisions that criminalize dissent and expression through the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act remind us that we must not take online speech for granted. These trends illustrate deeper governance failures, particularly the lack of transparency, oversight, and accountability in digital governance and decision-making.
While the Constitution deals in general principles and lays down guardrails, it is the job of a digital governance framework, through legislation, policies, implementation plans and infrastructural choices, to translate these principles for different circumstances and contexts.
While applying the Constitutional framework to safeguard these rights is key, a governance framework that operationalizes them is equally necessary to ensure that rights are not merely privileges that can be withdrawn on a whim, but are instead baked into digital governance, so that they can only be denied under exceptional circumstances and through effective judicial oversight. Governance interventions, such as algorithmic impact assessments, independent ethics review boards, and mandatory public consultation for digital policy, offer forward-looking pathways.
Some have argued for a charter of digital rights or a new set of rights for the digital age. While there are merits to this approach, especially as technological transformations are testing the existing framework of rights, the blueprint for a just and equitable framework for digital rights can already be found in a digital governance system that simply puts these basic principles into practice. Our challenge is to build agile systems and institutions that are ready to meet the moment.
1. Human Rights Council, ‘The promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet’, United Nations, 16 July 2012, A/HRC/RES/20/8.
2. Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto and others v President of Pakistan and others, (PLD 1998 Supreme Court 388).
3. Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights, “Artificial intelligence must be grounded in human rights, says High Commissioner,” 12 July 2023, https://www.ohchr.org/en/statements-and-speeches/2023/;07/artificial-intelligence-must-be-grounded-human-rights-says-high.
4. Article 86: Right to Explanation of Individual Decision-Making, EU Artificial Intelligence Act
5. Government of Pakistan, ‘Digital Nation Pakistan Act, 2025’, Preamble, 29 January 2025.